Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 234 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#81

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

kwhitefoot wrote: post #43
nescioquid wrote: post #25

I have been under the impression that EULAs have not really been tested in court and that there is probably some reticence to actually attempt enforcement in case the result would invalidate the practice of EULAs altogether. Normally, when you agree to a license, it is available for review and is agreed to before the purchase has been completed. Software EULAs -- presented after purchase -- seem more like a mugging.…

> EULAs have not really been tested in court In Europe they do not need to be tested in court. They are not part of the contract of sale because you cannot see them before you complete the purchase. They are unenforceable.

Meanwhile in the USA, we prioritize corporate profits over consumers. "Caveat emptor" is the motto. It's your own fault for not doing research!

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#82

Post by johnklos »

RED has always had all sorts of BS licensing gobbleygook. When the first RED cameras finally became available, the software absolute shit. They had all sorts of stuff in their license agreements about not reverse engineering, not redistributing, et cetera.

I had to figure out many parts of their software and make wrappers and separate tools so that queues could be started and run without monitoring, because their software would famously have an error, then just stop, making batch transcoding a full-time job.

I intentionally posted all sorts of things that were in violation of their license agreements in hopes that they'd take note and try to make a stink, but they didn't, probably because they didn't want to raise awareness of how badly their software sucks by fighting with people who were making it better.

The company has always pretended to be much more grandiose than they really are (see their attempt at making a cell phone), but really, they're just OK.

Honestly, though, the quality of their codecs suck. The color information just isn't there. You can watch Netflix and immediately tell which things were shot on RED, because they'll be grainy (which they think is a feature) and will lack nuanced color. Compare with anything shot on, say, Arri ALEXA, and you'll never look at RED the same way again.

All of this is to say that the company probably won't do anything nefarious that would get tons of negative attention, but they do always think they're the Next Big Thing, so you never know when the crazy will outweigh the careful. If it were me, I'd return it.

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#83

Post by mytailorisrich »

cestith wrote: post #61
mhitza wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but not limited to information about your RED Camera, Camera Module, computer, system and application software, usage, content , and peripherals. Content might be anything stored on the camera in this case. I'm also glossing over the followup clause that states they are in their full right to remove in a future update features you already have.

Information about content is not the content itself. It's metadata as opposed to user data. I'd be more concerned about the "not limited to" part than the "information about ..." followed by a long list of things they can get information about part. But I think, in my lay (non-lawyer) reading of that that they've set the spirit of the agreement. They don't want to miss some little detail in their list, but they're se…

Yes, usually this turn of phrase is basically giving examples of what they mean while making sure it is clear that this is not the full, exhaustive list, if only just to be covered in case they decide to collect further diagnostic data down the road.

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#84

Post by eli »

johnklos wrote: post #82

RED has always had all sorts of BS licensing gobbleygook. When the first RED cameras finally became available, the software absolute shit. They had all sorts of stuff in their license agreements about not reverse engineering, not redistributing, et cetera. I had to figure out many parts of their software and make wrappers and separate tools so that queues could be started and run without monitoring, because their sof…

Doesn't pretty much all closed-source proprietary software prohibit reverse engineering and redistribution?

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#85

Post by red_throwaway »

technothrasher wrote: post #57
jrockway wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're entitled to return it for a full refund. The same would be true if you took some video and didn't like how the camera worked, or just got cold feet on your $30k purchase. I get the feeling that you want more than that (like a custom license agreement, or some punishment for the sales person for not mentioning the EULA), and I don't think you're going to get that. Return it for a refund, RED has to sell…

> or just got cold feet on your $30k purchase. You are typically not entitled to a refund in this situation. Many companies will allow it under a goodwill return policy, but they are not legally obligated in most situations.

I'm pretty sure I would be granted a refund if I asked for one. That being said, I'm not left with a lot of options after returning it because there aren't many comparable alternatives for this class of camera.

In fact, I don't know of even one camera that's as high quality without also being almost double the price. RED has a lot of leverage here.

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#86

Post by JaimeThompson »

et2o wrote: post #65
kube-system wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've hired a few, and they're all well aware that sloppy boilerplate is commonplace. They often suggest you take a realist approach to the situation as a whole, and consider the incentives of those involved.

This is exactly the answer. Why would the manufacturer of a professional-targeted camera take an action that would destroy their business?

>Why would the manufacturer of a professional-targeted camera take an action that would destroy their business?

To make the next quarters number look better.

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#87

Post by redwall_hp »

nescioquid wrote: post #25

I have been under the impression that EULAs have not really been tested in court and that there is probably some reticence to actually attempt enforcement in case the result would invalidate the practice of EULAs altogether. Normally, when you agree to a license, it is available for review and is agreed to before the purchase has been completed. Software EULAs -- presented after purchase -- seem more like a mugging.…

I vaguely remember computer magazines in the early 2000s talking about that: some lawyers suggested that EULAs were of questionable enforcability because they were negotiated solely by one party with legal resources and signed by one party without. The general status quo seems to have been "make threats and settle out of court" ever since, avoiding any sort of legal precedent being set.

I'm not a lawyer, so perhaps I'm unaware of a high profile case where such a thing happened, but as far as I'm aware EULAs are very similar to the state of DMCA takedowns: widely used as a cudgel against the little guy, since most people don't have the resources to fight it out in court, and in the rare cases of resistance they go for an out of court settlement.

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#88

Post by JoeAltmaier »

kwhitefoot wrote: post #43
nescioquid wrote: post #25

I have been under the impression that EULAs have not really been tested in court and that there is probably some reticence to actually attempt enforcement in case the result would invalidate the practice of EULAs altogether. Normally, when you agree to a license, it is available for review and is agreed to before the purchase has been completed. Software EULAs -- presented after purchase -- seem more like a mugging.…

> EULAs have not really been tested in court In Europe they do not need to be tested in court. They are not part of the contract of sale because you cannot see them before you complete the purchase. They are unenforceable.

The rule is the same in the USA. Which in practice doesn't matter much.

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#89

Post by pessimizer »

jrockway wrote: post #24
red_throwaway wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this! The sales person made absolutely no mention of any licensing terms or agreements that I would need to sign off on before my camera became usable as a camera.

I think you're entitled to return it for a full refund. The same would be true if you took some video and didn't like how the camera worked, or just got cold feet on your $30k purchase. I get the feeling that you want more than that (like a custom license agreement, or some punishment for the sales person for not mentioning the EULA), and I don't think you're going to get that. Return it for a refund, RED has to sell…

> I think you're entitled to return it for a full refund.

By law?

Re: Ask HN: Is the EULA on my new $30k RED cinema camera legal?

#90

Post by red_throwaway »

Jon_Lowtek wrote: post #70

Write to the company and ask for clarification and an option to opt-out. This has three benefits: 1) they may give you additional information what exactly they are doing 2) they get information that their customers find it suspicious and may clarify it for everyone and 3) they may actually add an option to opt out

This is great advice!
Post reply on HN